NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060804/ap_on_go_co/clinton_iraq_14

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to resign, hours after excoriating him at a public hearing over what she called "failed policy" in Iraq

LOL - What a dumbitch! The Iraq war was conceived in brilliance and executed with flair. I'm only surprised that, well, maybe not surprised, that dumbitch can't figure it out.

For thirty years the US tried to ignore Arab militants and terrorists. Hell - we even just packed up after the Lebanon marine base bombing. 9/11 made it clear we could no longer ignore the terrorists. Trouble is - where are they? How do we flush them out? How do we get them to not attack our cities?

Voila! Iraq! A hostile nation with a brutal dictator. We take out the dictator and establish a presence in Iraq! Now the terrorists are not attacking our cities - they attack each other! They attack Arabs! They sometimes even attack our military! But WE'VE MOVED THE WAR FROM OUR BACKYARD TO THEIRS! It is much easier to flush them out there than it is here. Brilliant!

Yes - Iraq is a magnet for terrorists. Good! Better there than here. Public opinion in Arab states is already turning against terrorists in Arab states. Should things in Iraq settle I say we go to Iran and do the same thing. Chances are good that they are responsible for most of the terrorism the world sees now anyway.

Yes - Rumsfeld and Bush did the right thing. There have been no successful domestic terrorists attacks in five years. There is no denying that.

The Arab public is are acting like delinquent teens caught misbehaving - they react with anger and frustration. Just like delinquent teens they will soon discover that their delinquent behavior is the root of their problems. Either that or they spend the rest of their lives just like delinquent teens – isolated, incarcerated and cut off from civilisation...

Hmm... Methinks your satire could use some work...

Encore cette merde...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060804/ap_on_go_co/clinton_iraq_14

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to resign, hours after excoriating him at a public hearing over what she called "failed policy" in Iraq

LOL - What a dumbitch! The Iraq war was conceived in brilliance and executed with flair. I'm only surprised that, well, maybe not surprised, that dumbitch can't figure it out.

For thirty years the US tried to ignore Arab militants and terrorists. Hell - we even just packed up after the Lebanon marine base bombing. 9/11 made it clear we could no longer ignore the terrorists. Trouble is - where are they? How do we flush them out? How do we get them to not attack our cities?

Voila! Iraq! A hostile nation with a brutal dictator. We take out the dictator and establish a presence in Iraq! Now the terrorists are not attacking our cities - they attack each other! They attack Arabs! They sometimes even attack our military! But WE'VE MOVED THE WAR FROM OUR BACKYARD TO THEIRS! It is much easier to flush them out there than it is here. Brilliant!

Yes - Iraq is a magnet for terrorists. Good! Better there than here. Public opinion in Arab states is already turning against terrorists in Arab states. Should things in Iraq settle I say we go to Iran and do the same thing. Chances are good that they are responsible for most of the terrorism the world sees now anyway.

Yes - Rumsfeld and Bush did the right thing. There have been no successful domestic terrorists attacks in five years. There is no denying that.

The Arab public is are acting like delinquent teens caught misbehaving - they react with anger and frustration. Just like delinquent teens they will soon discover that their delinquent behavior is the root of their problems. Either that or they spend the rest of their lives just like delinquent teens – isolated, incarcerated and cut off from civilisation...

So basically you don't care about the Iraqis or Saddam; you just think that it was a good plan to put the terrorist focus on Iraq instead of the US right? Iraqi lives aren't worth shit right? They're justa buncha A-Rabs - uh-heeyuh.

I gotta ask you though... if all the terrorists are in Iraq, then why are there terrorists still trying and sometimes suceeding to carry out attacks on US, Canada, Spain , Great Britian, Israel... hmmm not so brilliant after all.

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but...

Idiocy.

If you think that having U.S. forces in Iraq somehow prevents terrorists from buying a plane ticket and coming to the United States, you are sadly mistaken. Hell, they don't even have to buy a plane ticket to the U.S. to get into the country...they can just fly to Mexico or Canada and then dance across the border. The U.S. border is not secure.

The only thing that has kept us from being attacked again is probably sheer, dumb luck. The Bush foreign policy has isolated US from our allies. We will be unable to mount a serious global response to terrorism until Bush is out of office...he simply does not have the political capital necessary to do it himself.

So basically you don't care about the Iraqis or Saddam; you just think that it was a good plan to put the terrorist focus on Iraq instead of the US right? Iraqi lives aren't worth shit right? They're justa buncha A-Rabs - uh-heeyuh.

I gotta ask you though... if all the terrorists are in Iraq, then why are there terrorists still trying and sometimes suceeding to carry out attacks on US, Canada, Spain , Great Britian, Israel... hmmm not so brilliant after all.

Given a choice between American or non-american lives - I choose American. Duh. Given a choice between America or somewhere else - I choose somewhere else. - Duh. So far no suicide bombers in the US.

Suggesting I am a bigot only shows the limited scope of your ability to have a civil discussion and the barren nature of your point.

So basically you don't care about the Iraqis or Saddam; you just think that it was a good plan to put the terrorist focus on Iraq instead of the US right? Iraqi lives aren't worth shit right? They're justa buncha A-Rabs - uh-heeyuh.

I gotta ask you though... if all the terrorists are in Iraq, then why are there terrorists still trying and sometimes suceeding to carry out attacks on US, Canada, Spain , Great Britian, Israel... hmmm not so brilliant after all.
I know I'm not worried about the Iraqis. See, they aren't concerned with my fellow army troops, and in cases are trying to kill us. So, I see no need to worry about them. I'm glad Saddam is gone, because he was a loose cannon in the Middle East.


And, please, do tell what successful terrorist attacks have occurred here in the US since the Iraq war started?

It seems that, in this light, the Iraq war has served the purpose of pulling terrorists back towards the Middle East. And what US citizens are they focused on? Soldiers. Far more dangerous prey than big shiny towers with thousands of people in them.

And not all terrorists are related, so not all of these recent attacks in other countries can be attributed to Muslims.

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but...

Idiocy.

If you think that having U.S. forces in Iraq somehow prevents terrorists from buying a plane ticket and coming to the United States, you are sadly mistaken. Hell, they don't even have to buy a plane ticket to the U.S. to get into the country...they can just fly to Mexico or Canada and then dance across the border. The U.S. border is not secure.

The only thing that has kept us from being attacked again is probably sheer, dumb luck. The Bush foreign policy has isolated US from our allies. We will be unable to mount a serious global response to terrorism until Bush is out of office...he simply does not have the political capital necessary to do it himself.

I mean this in the nicest way - but you're full of shit. You really have no evidence that the lack of terrorist events in the US is doe to anything other than Bush and Rumsfeld excellent strategy of moving the war closer to the terrorists. They have no need to go thorugh the trouble of buying a plane ticket to become martyrs anymore. Brilliance!

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but...

Idiocy.

If you think that having U.S. forces in Iraq somehow prevents terrorists from buying a plane ticket and coming to the United States, you are sadly mistaken. Hell, they don't even have to buy a plane ticket to the U.S. to get into the country...they can just fly to Mexico or Canada and then dance across the border. The U.S. border is not secure.

The only thing that has kept us from being attacked again is probably sheer, dumb luck. The Bush foreign policy has isolated US from our allies. We will be unable to mount a serious global response to terrorism until Bush is out of office...he simply does not have the political capital necessary to do it himself.

It doesn't keep them from buying a ticket, but it DOES give them a strategically and logistically easier target, one which is closer and far easier to infiltrate. The availability of that target pulls them away from the US and closer to home. That actually makes perfect sense. Think about it, what would be easier to attack from the US, Mexico or Iran?

Given a choice between American or non-american lives - I choose American. Duh. Given a choice between America or somewhere else - I choose somewhere else. - Duh. So far no suicide bombers in the US.

Suggesting I am a bigot only shows the limited scope of your ability to have a civil discussion and the barren nature of your point.

You do realize that the terrorists in Iraq are there to kill the American soldiers we put there, right? The "brilliance", as you put it, of getting all the terrorists to go to Iraq depends on leaving our soldiers there as bait. If you really valued American lives, wouldn't you want to use troops from some other country as bait, say as part of a multi-national force that our "brilliant" unilateral action precludes, hm?

So, as long as we stay at war somewhere else, we're perfectly safe.


I think I read this story before...

You do realize that the terrorists in Iraq are there to kill the American soldiers we put there, right? The "brilliance", as you put it, of getting all the terrorists to go to Iraq depends on leaving our soldiers there as bait. If you really valued American lives, wouldn't you want to use troops from some other country as bait, say as part of a multi-national force that our "brilliant" unilateral action precludes, hm?

We gave the rest of the world a chance - they balked and/or turned tail and ran. The Iraqis are the only ones brave enough to join us in any significant numbers to defeat teh terrorists.

As far as the brave soldiers there - they are hardly sitting ducks. Unlike the people in the world trade centers - they have guns, armor, tanks, etc. THey also have a kill ration against the terrorists that is quite one-sided. I'm good with that - though like anyone else - I'd prefer it to be even more one-sided.

how common were terrorist attacks on American soil before the war on Iraq exactly?

I wonder how the war widows and soldiers in Iraq feel about this brilliant strategy?

how common were terrorist attacks on American soil before the war on Iraq exactly?

I wonder how the war widows and soldiers in Iraq feel about this brilliant strategy?
It'd be a good thing to remember that the attack before 9/11 took place 8 years prior.

We gave the rest of the world a chance - they balked and/or turned tail and ran. The Iraqis are the only ones brave enough to join us in any significant numbers to defeat teh terrorists.

As far as the brave soldiers there - they are hardly sitting ducks. Unlike the people in the world trade centers - they have guns, armor, tanks, etc. THey also have a kill ration against the terrorists that is quite one-sided. I'm good with that - though like anyone else - I'd prefer it to be even more one-sided.

That wasn't satire? Oops...

We gave the rest of the world a chance - they balked and/or turned tail and ran. The Iraqis are the only ones brave enough to join us in any significant numbers to defeat teh terrorists.

okay now I support Britain pulling out of this as fast as possible I don't want British lives to be put at risk if the American want to use this to kill every man woman and child in the middle east (and I can assure you if you pull the shit your suggesting they will turn Iraq into an American-less wasteland or a sea of blood)

Yeah you really are the only guys still there:rolleyes:

I mean this in the nicest way - but you're full of shit. You really have no evidence that the lack of terrorist events in the US is doe to anything other than Bush and Rumsfeld excellent strategy of moving the war closer to the terrorists. They have no need to go thorugh the trouble of buying a plane ticket to become martyrs anymore. Brilliance!
Take the weekend off and come back refreshed and full of love for your fellow forum users.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060804/ap_on_go_co/clinton_iraq_14

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to resign, hours after excoriating him at a public hearing over what she called "failed policy" in Iraq

LOL - What a dumbitch! The Iraq war was conceived in brilliance and executed with flair. I'm only surprised that, well, maybe not surprised, that dumbitch can't figure it out.

For thirty years the US tried to ignore Arab militants and terrorists. Hell - we even just packed up after the Lebanon marine base bombing. 9/11 made it clear we could no longer ignore the terrorists. Trouble is - where are they? How do we flush them out? How do we get them to not attack our cities?

Voila! Iraq! A hostile nation with a brutal dictator. We take out the dictator and establish a presence in Iraq! Now the terrorists are not attacking our cities - they attack each other! They attack Arabs! They sometimes even attack our military! But WE'VE MOVED THE WAR FROM OUR BACKYARD TO THEIRS! It is much easier to flush them out there than it is here. Brilliant!

Yes - Iraq is a magnet for terrorists. Good! Better there than here. Public opinion in Arab states is already turning against terrorists in Arab states. Should things in Iraq settle I say we go to Iran and do the same thing. Chances are good that they are responsible for most of the terrorism the world sees now anyway.

Yes - Rumsfeld and Bush did the right thing. There have been no successful domestic terrorists attacks in five years. There is no denying that.

The Arab public is are acting like delinquent teens caught misbehaving - they react with anger and frustration. Just like delinquent teens they will soon discover that their delinquent behavior is the root of their problems. Either that or they spend the rest of their lives just like delinquent teens – isolated, incarcerated and cut off from civilisation...



No domestic attacks for five years? Hmm....I can't remember there ever being any domestic attacks ever before 9/11. If I'm forgetting one, please enlighten me.


Edit: Pearl Harbor doesn't count.

We gave the rest of the world a chance - they balked and/or turned tail and ran. The Iraqis are the only ones brave enough to join us in any significant numbers to defeat teh terrorists.

As far as the brave soldiers there - they are hardly sitting ducks. Unlike the people in the world trade centers - they have guns, armor, tanks, etc. THey also have a kill ration against the terrorists that is quite one-sided. I'm good with that - though like anyone else - I'd prefer it to be even more one-sided.
With the kill ratio as one-sided as it has been, what incentive have the terrorists to even continue attacking the troops in Iraq? If, as you say, terrorists are doing so badly, they'll recognize when to cut their losses and find better targets, like the continental U.S. and its cities. If anything, by showing terrorists that coming into contact with American soldiers is going to get them killed, they may turn even more attention to civilian targets than they have before.

how common were terrorist attacks on American soil before the war on Iraq exactly?

I wonder how the war widows and soldiers in Iraq feel about this brilliant strategy?
Considering we've surpassed the number of people killed in WTC (2,752) in Iraq (39,702 civilians, 2,583 US military) we're sure making sure that all them killings is stopped, yup. :rolleyes:

No domestic attacks for five years? Hmm....I can't remember there ever being any domestic attacks ever before 9/11. If I'm forgetting one, please enlighten me.


Edit: Pearl Harbor doesn't count.
Oklahoma City, WTC Bombing (The only non-homegrown terrorist attack), and there was one in my home town of someone sending a pipe bomb to the local ranger station for some reasion.

I mean this in the nicest way - but you're full of shit. You really have no evidence that the lack of terrorist events in the US is doe to anything other than Bush and Rumsfeld excellent strategy of moving the war closer to the terrorists. They have no need to go thorugh the trouble of buying a plane ticket to become martyrs anymore. Brilliance!

And you have no evidence that Bush's foreign policy has kept terrorists from striking again here at home. We know only that they have not done it again since 9-11.

No domestic attacks for five years? Hmm....I can't remember there ever being any domestic attacks ever before 9/11. If I'm forgetting one, please enlighten me.


Edit: Pearl Harbor doesn't count.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001454.html

Whole list, attacks in America or against Americans abroad.

Oklahoma City, WTC Bombing (The only non-homegrown terrorist attack), and there was one in my home town of someone sending a pipe bomb to the local ranger station for some reasion.
Nah, we've been hit by Bolsheviks, Nationalists, etc., but most attacks on Americans have occurred abroad.

okay now I support Britain pulling out of this as fast as possible I don't want British lives to be put at risk if the American want to use this to kill every man woman and child in the middle east (and I can assure you if you pull the shit your suggesting they will turn Iraq into an American-less wasteland or a sea of blood)

Yeah you really are the only guys still there:rolleyes:
Yes, Bozzy is of course an excellent indicator of American foreign policy. If his post really changed your mind about the UK's role in the war, then you must be high. Otherwise, you already disagreed.

Nah, we've been hit by Bolsheviks, Nationalists, etc., but most attacks on Americans have occurred abroad.
Ok, missed two attacks on US soil, but last I checked PR is a US territory and Bolsheviks was a poltical movement... but it was never solved.

Oklahoma City, WTC Bombing (The only non-homegrown terrorist attack), and there was one in my home town of someone sending a pipe bomb to the local ranger station for some reasion.


Ok. I forgot about that one.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001454.html

Whole list, attacks in America or against Americans abroad.


I stand corrected!



Meh, my area is military history and tactics anyway, I'll just get back to that ;)

Voila! Iraq! A hostile nation with a brutal dictator. We take out the dictator and establish a presence in Iraq! Now the terrorists are not attacking our cities - they attack each other! They attack Arabs! They sometimes even attack our military! But WE'VE MOVED THE WAR FROM OUR BACKYARD TO THEIRS! It is much easier to flush them out there than it is here. Brilliant!

Yes - Iraq is a magnet for terrorists. Good! Better there than here. Public opinion in Arab states is already turning against terrorists in Arab states. Should things in Iraq settle I say we go to Iran and do the same thing. Chances are good that they are responsible for most of the terrorism the world sees now anyway.

Yes - Rumsfeld and Bush did the right thing.

You have no moral right to cause innocent civilians to be incinerated just because they are Arabs.

Bush didn't do the right thing. He got rid of a dictator who was quelling Islamism in Iraq. That was fucking stupid, to make Iraq a breeding ground for terrorists.

Like all American wars it will come back to bite you in the ass. Expect multiple atrocities on your homeland within the next 20 years.

There have been no successful domestic terrorists attacks in five years. There is no denying that.
There have been numerous terrorist attacks on the West in the past five years.

The Arab public is are acting like delinquent teens caught misbehaving - they react with anger and frustration. Just like delinquent teens they will soon discover that their delinquent behavior is the root of their problems. Either that or they spend the rest of their lives just like delinquent teens – isolated, incarcerated and cut off from civilisation...
You openly condemn them to the slaughter and expect them to be happy about it? Take responsibility for your own problems. You're acting like the delinquent teen here.

Have you no respect for human life at all?

Given a choice between American or non-american lives - I choose American. Duh. Given a choice between America or somewhere else - I choose somewhere else. - Duh. So far no suicide bombers in the US.

Suggesting I am a bigot only shows the limited scope of your ability to have a civil discussion and the barren nature of your point.
What other explanation is there for your complete lack of respect for Arab human life? It's not just a matter of choosing Americans over Iraqis. It's openly supporting a policy that will kill for more humans than the alternatives.

I know I'm not worried about the Iraqis. See, they aren't concerned with my fellow army troops, and in cases are trying to kill us. So, I see no need to worry about them.
What happened to all the love for the purple-fingered Iraqis? Don't you care about them any more?

It's refreshing to see the American Right be honest about what they believe. They believe in Genocide. Just like some other less democratic regimes I can think of.

We gave the rest of the world a chance - they balked and/or turned tail and ran. The Iraqis are the only ones brave enough to join us in any significant numbers to defeat teh terrorists.
Not that they had a choice! Besides, I thought the only thing the Iraqis were good for was getting killed in place of Americans.

I stand corrected!



Meh, my area is military history and tactics anyway, I'll just get back to that ;)
LOL, its OK, those attacks didn't get much publicity anyways, although recent ones did manage to stick in some of our memories.

1) What happened to all the love for the purple-fingered Iraqis? Don't you care about them any more?

2) It's refreshing to see the American Right be honest about what they believe. They believe in Genocide. Just like some other less democratic regimes I can think of.

1) I like the Iraqis alright. Just not as much as Americans, and not as much as US soldiers.

2) LOL! Nice straw man. No one advocated genocide, but your failing mental faculties apparently can't grasp "Right-wing" without throwing in words like
GENOCIDEMURDERLIARSSCUMBAGSKILLERSBABYEATERSMURDERERSHATETHEMHATETHEM

That means you are bigoted, mildly psychotic, and extraordinarily entertaining.


By the way, I'm not an example of the American "Right." More of the military faction, and not even the total part of that. Although we aren't big on outreach to foreign nations, thats true. But I'm surprised you think the welfare of foreign nationals is our business anyways. After all, normally you'd be saying it was none of our business....

1) I like the Iraqis alright. Just not as much as Americans, and not as much as US soldiers.
I know I'm not worried about the Iraqis. See, they aren't concerned with my fellow army troops, and in cases are trying to kill us. So, I see no need to worry about them.
Why would you be not concerned about people you like? Why would you like people who aren't concerned about you?

2) LOL! Nice straw man. No one advocated genocide
Yes he did:
Now the terrorists are not attacking our cities - they attack each other! They attack Arabs!
...
Yes - Iraq is a magnet for terrorists. Good! Better there than here.
For saying that Iraqis deserve death just because they live there, he's the bigot.


By the way, I'm not an example of the American "Right." More of the military faction, and not even the total part of that. Although we aren't big on outreach to foreign nations, thats true. But I'm surprised you think the welfare of foreign nationals is our business anyways. After all, normally you'd be saying it was none of our business....
How do you know what I would normally say?

Maybe you've heard of the concept of responsibility? You're responsible for the welfare and defence of Iraqis if you've created the situation in which the aforementioned are endangered.

I know I'm not worried about the Iraqis. See, they aren't concerned with my fellow army troops, and in cases are trying to kill us. So, I see no need to worry about them. I'm glad Saddam is gone, because he was a loose cannon in the Middle East.

Why should the Iraqis be concerned about troops that invaded and destabalized their country? Why should they be concerned with an invading force that invited terrorism and religious extreemists into their government?

Wouldn't you take up arms against an invading army if they came into your country and decided they were going to put their own style of government in place?

Wouldnt you be pissed when they started torturing your family and friends?

Tell me you wouldnt be and I can only believe that you are a liar. Plus you are advocating the death of thousands upon thousands of innocent Iraqis at the hands of terrorists as well as US troops. And as said earlier you also advocate using US troops as bait. Sure you care about US troops. :rolleyes:

You aren't concerned about hundreds of thousands of innocent people being thrown into violent chaos because of this brilliant plan you support.

And, please, do tell what successful terrorist attacks have occurred here in the US since the Iraq war started?

Did I say that the US was the only target? No I didn't. Also I didn't say there were any successful attacks against the US, did I? No I didn't, but there were plans foiled, supposedly, so obviously if they caught people trying to get at the US (people already inside the US apparently), then the US must still be a target at this point in time while the war is going on. Plus there were A.Q. attacks in other countries during the war. Successful ones. So obviously they arent all in Iraq nor are they all in the middle east. The brilliant plan you back is only making the US more hated... creating greater chances for the US to be attacked.

It seems that, in this light, the Iraq war has served the purpose of pulling terrorists back towards the Middle East. And what US citizens are they focused on? Soldiers. Far more dangerous prey than big shiny towers with thousands of people in them.

So you havent heard? The war is helping terroist recruitment. our own generals say that the violence is growing. They say that there is no limit to the number of insurgents. They arent dwindling in numbers dear boy, they are growing. I applaud your compassion.

And not all terrorists are related, so not all of these recent attacks in other countries can be attributed to Muslims.

but some, if not most, can right? which attacks are you talkign about that werent attributed to Muslims? Do you really believe that you are saying here?

So basically you don't care about the Iraqis or Saddam; you just think that it was a good plan to put the terrorist focus on Iraq instead of the US right? Iraqi lives aren't worth shit right? They're justa buncha A-Rabs - uh-heeyuh.

I gotta ask you though... if all the terrorists are in Iraq, then why are there terrorists still trying and sometimes suceeding to carry out attacks on US, Canada, Spain , Great Britian, Israel... hmmm not so brilliant after all.

Americans are worth more to me than Iraqis.

Because ya'll liberal pantywaists would get your nickers in a wad if we went after anymore "dark skinned people". We're already up past our qouta for this month with the fielding of some new small arms systems....

Americans are worth more to me than Iraqis.

Because ya'll liberal pantywaists would get your nickers in a wad if we went after anymore "dark skinned people". We're already up past our qouta for this month with the fielding of some new small arms systems....

I feel very sorry for people like you.

if there were only more liberal pantywaists in the world who were unwilling to approve of the wholesale slaughter of innocent people :(

Wouldn't you take up arms against an invading army if they came into your country and decided they were going to put their own style of government in place?

If I had a dictatorial and totalitarian gov't and they were replacing it with a free one?


*Crickets*

No. In fact, I just might fight on their side to wipe out the remnants of the last regime to make things easier for the next.

Wouldnt you be pissed when they started torturing your family and friends?

If I found out my brother was placing IEDs aimed at killing the people who are rebuilding my country, I'd torture him myself. For one, he would be dishonoring my family. Secondly, he's inviting a 500lb USAF curb-stomping to my family when he comes into our home. Thirdly, he'd be a fool.

Tell me you wouldnt be and I can only believe that you are a liar. Plus you are advocating the death of thousands upon thousands of innocent Iraqis at the hands of terrorists as well as US troops. And as said earlier you also advocate using US troops as bait. Sure you care about US troops. :rolleyes:

We use troops as bait to get Hadj out in the open. Works wonders, of course, until little Adbulla hadji is ambushed. Good for us.

You aren't concerned about hundreds of thousands of innocent people being thrown into violent chaos because of this brilliant plan you support.

I'm not sweating it.


but some, if not most, can right? which attacks are you talkign about that werent attributed to Muslims? Do you really believe that you are saying here?

arr

I feel very sorry for people like you.


My countrymen are worth more to me. Tough luck man.....

So, Sumababw ahtergwehgrhgye3hru, would you say I'm more valuable, than say, your cousin?

If not, I feel very sorry for people like you :mad:


Right?

Logic is seeping from your post, and chuck norris falls on his face to worship your golden image.


NOT!

I feel very sorry for people like you.

if there were only more liberal pantywaists in the world who were unwilling to approve of the wholesale slaughter of innocent people :(

Yep, because the US m855 round is greentipped-it was made to go through the walls of homes, it typically homes in on the heads of victims, mainly children.....

Thankfully liberals are typically pantywaists for a reason.....:D

arr


those that are bombing civilians are foriegn to iraq genius.

you would help teh invading army to bomb innocent civilans and imprison them and torture them and rape them and kill them? your own countrymen? the sadness grows.

guess I'll stop feeding the troll now.

My countrymen are worth more to me. Tough luck man.....

So, Sumababw ahtergwehgrhgye3hru, would you say I'm more valuable, than say, your cousin?

Human life, is human life. None is worth more, none is worth less. To believe otherwise is, simply, to be biased. To believe a life is more valuable based on what country they are from is to be a bigot, and possibly a racist.


If not, I feel very sorry for people like you :mad:

I don't feel sorry for you. I'm disgusted by you, but I don't feel sorry.

NOT!

Congratulations, you have attained a debate style on par with the brilliance of a pre teen in the 80s.

My countrymen are worth more to me. Tough luck man.....

So, Sumababw ahtergwehgrhgye3hru, would you say I'm more valuable, than say, your cousin?

If not, I feel very sorry for people like you :mad:


Right?

Logic is seeping from your post, and chuck norris falls on his face to worship your golden image.


NOT!


okay one more trolly snack

I don't support the killing or even torture of anyone: family, countrymen, fellow humans, rapists, murders, or even non-human animals.

how pantywasity of me :rolleyes:

night night slick

Human life, is human life. None is worth more, none is worth less. To believe otherwise is, simply, to be biased. To believe a life is more valuable based on what country they are from is to be a bigot, and possibly a racist.




I don't feel sorry for you. I'm disgusted by you, but I don't feel sorry.



Congratulations, you have attained a debate style on par with the brilliance of a pre teen in the 80s.

Hard to be 'bigoted' and 'racist' when America's got people from every corner of the globe. Red, Yellow, black, white,green, pink, if it's a skin color we have it.

I find it messed up that you aren't patriotic enough to love your own countrymen more than other people.....weird, but you are probably from Europe, so that says much.

Human life is Human life. All are equal in God's eye, because to God, a business degree is nothing, a HS diploma is nothing, nor is a lifetime-do gooder award. He is no respecter of persons.

However, I will err on the side of Americans....

It's my firm beleif that terrorists should be tortured for information then executed. If they're Americans, however, they are protected from that due to the BoR, so it's just straight to the chopping block unless there are dire emergencies....

Do to my attempts to keep sane I'm not going to read anything else written under this topic. I hate you all. (but only on thursdays)

Do to my attempts to keep sane I'm not going to read anything else written under this topic. I hate you all. (but only on thursdays)
...Today is Friday...

EDIT:
*checks clock*
actually, it's Saturday for me...

Do to my attempts to keep sane I'm not going to read anything else written under this topic. I hate you all. (but only on thursdays)

it's friday.

I'm a card carrying commie pink on friday from 3-4.

Hard to be 'bigoted' and 'racist' when America's got people from every corner of the globe. Red, Yellow, black, white,green, pink, if it's a skin color we have it.

To like one group of people over another group of people based simply on their country of origin is the definition of bigot.

If you also are motivated by the color of the skin, you're racist. Now if it's not true that you value arabs less for being arab, that's not racist.

But to value non americans less than americans makes you a bigot. That has nothing to do with race.

I find it messed up that you aren't patriotic enough to love your own countrymen more than other people.....weird, but you are probably from Europe, so that says much.

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal"... you're saying that supporting one of the founding principles of this nation calls into question my patriotism?

Human life is Human life.

Bingo.

PATRIOT, n. One to whom the interests of a part seem superior to those of the whole. The dupe of statesmen and the tool of conquerors.

PATRIOTISM, n. Combustible rubbish read to the torch of any one ambitious to illuminate his name. In Dr. Johnson's famous dictionary patriotism is defined as the last resort of a scoundrel. With all due respect to an enlightened but inferior lexicographer I beg to submit that it is the first.

-The Devil's Dictionary by Ambrose Bierce

Should things in Iraq settle I say we go to Iran and do the same thing. Chances are good that they are responsible for most of the terrorism the world sees now anyway.

No. Not Iran.

Your al-lies KSA and Pak are.

To like one group of people over another group of people based simply on their country of origin is the definition of bigot.

If you also are motivated by the color of the skin, you're racist. Now if it's not true that you value arabs less for being arab, that's not racist.

But to value non americans less than americans makes you a bigot. That has nothing to do with race.



"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal"... you're saying that supporting one of the founding principles of this nation calls into question my patriotism?



Bingo.

I made it clear. It's like...choosing a family member over a stranger. Someone you KNOW over someone you DON'T.

Yes, human life IS valuable (Most is, some certain pond scum you know I despise ISN'T human life, it's much lower). However, my countrymen are, well, MY Countrymen. We live in the same country, and I'd like it if they'd stay ALIVE, and they get automatic preference over anyone else. Sort of like a VIP seating, sort of.

Think I despise Arabs? Should have heard what I said About the leader of the Norther alliance, Massoud. Horrible loss when the taliban got him. Or, for that fact, some of the former Baathist army who have come over to the right side and are now fighting the bad guys in iraq-AQ/hadj/insurgents.

Or the IA/IP, though they may be some of the dumbest gomers around, they do a thankless job.

Or that one Arabic women who really made the Mullahs spit hatred and venom....

Or the Druze....

Etc.

No domestic attacks for five years? Hmm....I can't remember there ever being any domestic attacks ever before 9/11. If I'm forgetting one, please enlighten me.


Edit: Pearl Harbor doesn't count.
World Trade Center basement/garage, 1993. Read much?

No. Not Iran.

Your al-lies KSA and Pak are.

They're cleaning house themselves, something Iran ISN'T doing.

That's why we need to do it ourselves, maybe with some help from our Hebrew friends.

They've never seen iran before, and it's been a while since we have :p

They're cleaning house themselves, something Iran ISN'T doing.

The fuck they are cleaning house themselves.

Try reading Urdu press.

Troll rating 3/10.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060804/ap_on_go_co/clinton_iraq_14

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to resign, hours after excoriating him at a public hearing over what she called "failed policy" in Iraq

LOL - What a dumbitch! The Iraq war was conceived in brilliance and executed with flair. I'm only surprised that, well, maybe not surprised, that dumbitch can't figure it out.

For thirty years the US tried to ignore Arab militants and terrorists. Hell - we even just packed up after the Lebanon marine base bombing. 9/11 made it clear we could no longer ignore the terrorists. Trouble is - where are they? How do we flush them out? How do we get them to not attack our cities?

Voila! Iraq! A hostile nation with a brutal dictator. We take out the dictator and establish a presence in Iraq! Now the terrorists are not attacking our cities - they attack each other! They attack Arabs! They sometimes even attack our military! But WE'VE MOVED THE WAR FROM OUR BACKYARD TO THEIRS! It is much easier to flush them out there than it is here. Brilliant!

Yes - Iraq is a magnet for terrorists. Good! Better there than here. Public opinion in Arab states is already turning against terrorists in Arab states. Should things in Iraq settle I say we go to Iran and do the same thing. Chances are good that they are responsible for most of the terrorism the world sees now anyway.

Yes - Rumsfeld and Bush did the right thing. There have been no successful domestic terrorists attacks in five years. There is no denying that.

The Arab public is are acting like delinquent teens caught misbehaving - they react with anger and frustration. Just like delinquent teens they will soon discover that their delinquent behavior is the root of their problems. Either that or they spend the rest of their lives just like delinquent teens – isolated, incarcerated and cut off from civilisation...
And then you wonder why they want to fly planes into your buildings???

BRILLIANT, yeah some brilliance alright!!!

I can imagine that your post would do well as a recruitment poster for would be terrorists. All they would have to do is copy it and post it. Just BRILLIANT!!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060804/ap_on_go_co/clinton_iraq_14

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to resign, hours after excoriating him at a public hearing over what she called "failed policy" in Iraq


LOL - What a dumbitch! The Iraq war was conceived in brilliance and executed with flair. I'm only surprised that, well, maybe not surprised, that dumbitch can't figure it out.

Snippety and all.


THAT made absolutely no sense...

And then you wonder why they want to fly planes into your buildings???

BRILLIANT, yeah some brilliance alright!!!

I can imagine that your post would do well as a recruitment poster for would be terrorists. All they would have to do is copy it and post it. Just BRILLIANT!!


*cough cough* they wanted already to do that before the Iraq war?

Let's face it: even 1 sunni Arab able to do as he pleases is 1 too many.

Let's face it: even 1 sunni Arab able to do as he pleases is 1 too many.
Racism 4tw. :rolleyes:

Racism 4tw. :rolleyes:

No sir.

The imperative requirement to serve our own interests first.

Racism 4tw. :rolleyes:


Sure, and every sunni Arab left to his own plans really helps Darfur, doesn't it?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060804/ap_on_go_co/clinton_iraq_14

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to resign, hours after excoriating him at a public hearing over what she called "failed policy" in Iraq

LOL - What a dumbitch! The Iraq war was conceived in brilliance and executed with flair. I'm only surprised that, well, maybe not surprised, that dumbitch can't figure it out.

For thirty years the US tried to ignore Arab militants and terrorists. Hell - we even just packed up after the Lebanon marine base bombing. 9/11 made it clear we could no longer ignore the terrorists. Trouble is - where are they? How do we flush them out? How do we get them to not attack our cities?

Voila! Iraq! A hostile nation with a brutal dictator. We take out the dictator and establish a presence in Iraq! Now the terrorists are not attacking our cities - they attack each other! They attack Arabs! They sometimes even attack our military! But WE'VE MOVED THE WAR FROM OUR BACKYARD TO THEIRS! It is much easier to flush them out there than it is here. Brilliant!

Yes - Iraq is a magnet for terrorists. Good! Better there than here. Public opinion in Arab states is already turning against terrorists in Arab states. Should things in Iraq settle I say we go to Iran and do the same thing. Chances are good that they are responsible for most of the terrorism the world sees now anyway.

Yes - Rumsfeld and Bush did the right thing. There have been no successful domestic terrorists attacks in five years. There is no denying that.

The Arab public is are acting like delinquent teens caught misbehaving - they react with anger and frustration. Just like delinquent teens they will soon discover that their delinquent behavior is the root of their problems. Either that or they spend the rest of their lives just like delinquent teens – isolated, incarcerated and cut off from civilisation...

I haven't seen so much bullshit since I went to a ranch. The wohle Iraq war was impossibly flawed. It was named that al-Quadia were the perpetrators of the WTC disaaster. And where is al-Quadia? No one knows. But whats the most easiest country to invade? Iraq. It was even quoted that Rumsfeld had said to attack Iraq because it "would be easier to invade".

Now, yes Iraq is a dictatorship. But Saddam's rule was crumbling. He wouldn've been replaced within months after war was declared. And what happened when we invaded? His rule collapsed. And now instead of order being ruled by an iron fist the whole country exploded into Anarchy! Atleast Saddam Hussein held some sort of order!

Then you say its good because it attracts terrorists to Iraq, not the West. Crap. The London Bombings. Perpetrated by terrorists ON BEHALF of Iraq! If anything the Iraq war made it worse, as it allowed terrorist groups to recruit more Mujihadeen.

Whatever wobbly foundations the Iraq policy was made on have long since collapsed. And what makes it even worse was that we, Britain, were the ones who had founded Iraq. And now we are part of the things that destroyed it. Ironic, isn't it?

Sure, and every sunni Arab left to his own plans really helps Darfur, doesn't it?

So according to you, every sunni Arab wants to destroy everything non-Muslim and establish a Caliphate, thus should be put into work camps. If that's not racism, then the KKK sure as hell wasn't racist either.

So according to you, every sunni Arab wants to destroy everything non-Muslim and establish a Caliphate, thus should be put into work camps. If that's not racism, then the KKK sure as hell wasn't racist either.
not all of therm, but influental part of them which unfortunally make them all look bad.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060804/ap_on_go_co/clinton_iraq_14

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to resign, hours after excoriating him at a public hearing over what she called "failed policy" in Iraq

LOL - What a (same old, same old)off from civilisation...

Dear me....its hard to tell sarcasm/mockery from genuine rants these days....

the guy who started this topic is a moron.

claiming 9/11 gives acuse for iraq war.
osama hates husien.

for all americas out there, this is the true meaning of ironic.
the silly war against terrorism, created more terrorist. when you blow up peoples homes, you dont give them a choice but to be terrorist. either die tomorrow pointlessy, or die today making a stand.

the guy who started this topic is a moron.

claiming 9/11 gives acuse for iraq war.
osama hates husien.

for all americas out there, this is the true meaning of ironic.
the silly war against terrorism, created more terrorist. when you blow up peoples homes, you dont give them a choice but to be terrorist. either die tomorrow pointlessy, or die today making a stand.
so terrorism is ok, is basically what your saying here.

For thirty years the US tried to ignore Arab militants and terrorists. Somebody needs to research the Mujahideen.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001454.html

Whole list, attacks in America or against Americans abroad.It's a list, but it's hardly the whole list. Not one abortion clinic bombing is on there.

Americans are worth more to me than Iraqis. Why is a stranger born on one side of an invisible line more important than a stranger born on another side of an invisible line?

Yep, because the US m855 round is greentipped-it was made to go through the walls of homes, it typically homes in on the heads of victims, mainly children.....
Before you say or do things like this, just remember that you will be judged by God.

Americans are worth more to me than Iraqis.

It's not even a matter of choosing between the two. You could have had it so that neither Americans nor Iraqis died en masse. But no, you just hadto commit genocide.

Thankfully liberals are typically pantywaists for a reason
I'm a pantywaist for thinking that murder is wrong and a sin?

Hard to be 'bigoted' and 'racist' when America's got people from every corner of the globe. Red, Yellow, black, white,green, pink, if it's a skin color we have it.
Will xenophobic, ethnocentric and national supremacist do then?

I find it messed up that you aren't patriotic enough to love your own countrymen more than other people.....weird, but you are probably from Europe, so that says much.
If you love your country so much that you want to destroy other countries, you're not patriotic, you're a nationalist looney.

Human life is Human life. All are equal in God's eye, because to God, a business degree is nothing, a HS diploma is nothing, nor is a lifetime-do gooder award. He is no respecter of persons.

However, I will err on the side of Americans....
So what God wants means nothing to you when it doesn't suit your gut feelings then?

Why do you always revel in your gut instincts of bloodlust? That's exactly what Jesus is trying to lead us away from.

No sir.

The imperative requirement to serve our own interests first.
This depends on the assumption that all Sunni Arabs are harmful to our interests.

Iran is Shia, btw.

Hahaha that is possibly the most flawed logic I have ever heard for supporting the Iraq war.

1) The USA attacked a sovereign nation for no reason. If you remember correctly the terrorists were based in Afghanistan according to the US government. That is failing miserably. Iraq was the scapegoat.

2) Iraq may have been a dictatorship but I'd rather have someone like Saddam ruling with an Iron fist which kept the whole of the Middle East quiet than a nation sinking into civil war and other nations fighting each other.

3) Why is one life worth more than another purely because of geographical location? Answer it isn't. Human life is sacred and ALL people are born equal.

4) The US has started and continued an illegal war against a nation that hadn't threatened the US. Does the Geneva convention ring a bell.

5) The killing of terrorists and innocent civilians creates more terrorists not less genius:rolleyes:

6) Some of the biggest terrorists attacka have occured since the start of the war. Here's a list of a few:

9/11
The London Bombings
The Madrid Train Bombings
The Bali Bombings

*cough cough* they wanted already to do that before the Iraq war?
You really should do something about that nasty cough. :rolleyes:

I fully understand that 9/11 preceded the US invasion of Iraq, but have you even tried to understand why that happened?

Let's face it: even 1 sunni Arab able to do as he pleases is 1 too many.
Trying to blame everything on Sunni Arabs suggest that you know little about US involvement in the Middle East (http://www.zmag.org/middletimeline.htm)?

1947-48: U.S. backs Palestine partition plan. Israel established. U.S. declines to press Israel to allow expelled Palestinians to return.

1949: CIA backs military coup deposing elected government of Syria.1

1953: CIA helps overthrow the democratically‑elected Mossadeq government in Iran (which had nationalized the British oil company) leading to a quarter‑century of repressive and dictatorial rule by the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlevi.

1956: U.S. cuts off promised funding for Aswan Dam in Egypt after Egypt receives Eastern bloc arms.

1956: Israel, Britain, and France invade Egypt. U.S. does not support invasion, but the involvement of its NATO allies severely diminishes Washington's reputation in the region.

1958: U.S. troops land in Lebanon to preserve "stability".

early 1960s: U.S. unsuccessfully attempts assassination of Iraqi leader, Abdul Karim Qassim.2

1963: U.S. supports coup by Iraqi Ba'ath party (soon to be headed by Saddam Hussein) and reportedly gives them names of communists to murder, which they do with vigor.3

1967‑: U.S. blocks any effort in the Security Council to enforce SC Resolution 242, calling for Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in the 1967 war.

1970: Civil war between Jordan and PLO. Israel and U.S. discuss intervening on side of Jordan if Syria backs PLO.

1972: U.S. blocks Egyptian leader Anwar Sadat's efforts to reach a peace agreement with Israel.

1973: Airlifted U.S. military aid enables Israel to turn the tide in war with Syria and Egypt.

1973‑75: U.S. supports Kurdish rebels in Iraq. When Iran reaches an agreement with Iraq in 1975 and seals the border, Iraq slaughters Kurds and U.S. denies them refuge. Kissinger secretly explains that "covert action should not be confused with missionary work."4

1975: U.S. vetoes Security Council resolution condemning Israeli attacks on Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon.5

1978‑79: Iranians begin demonstrations against the Shah. U.S. tells Shah it supports him "without reservation" and urges him to act forcefully. Until the last minute, U.S. tries to organize military coup to save the Shah, but to no avail.6

1979‑88: U.S. begins covert aid to Mujahideen in Afghanistan six months before Soviet invasion in Dec. 1979.7 Over the next decade U.S. provides training and more than $3 billion in arms and aid.

1980‑88: Iran‑Iraq war. When Iraq invades Iran, the U.S. opposes any Security Council action to condemn the invasion. U.S. soon removes Iraq from its list of nations supporting terrorism and allows U.S. arms to be transferred to Iraq. At the same time, U.S. lets Israel provide arms to Iran and in 1985 U.S. provides arms directly (though secretly) to Iran. U.S. provides intelligence information to Iraq. Iraq uses chemical weapons in 1984; U.S. restores diplomatic relations with Iraq. 1987 U.S. sends its navy into the Persian Gulf, taking Iraq's side; an overly‑aggressive U.S. ship shoots down an Iranian civilian airliner, killing 290.

1981, 1986: U.S. holds military maneuvers off the coast of Libya in waters claimed by Libya with the clear purpose of provoking Qaddafi. In 1981, a Libyan plane fires a missile and U.S. shoots down two Libyan planes. In 1986, Libya fires missiles that land far from any target and U.S. attacks Libyan patrol boats, killing 72, and shore installations. When a bomb goes off in a Berlin nightclub, killing three, the U.S. charges that Qaddafi was behind it (possibly true) and conducts major bombing raids in Libya, killing dozens of civilians, including Qaddafi's adopted daughter.8

1982: U.S. gives "green light" to Israeli invasion of Lebanon,9 killing some 17 thousand civilians.10 U.S. chooses not to invoke its laws prohibiting Israeli use of U.S. weapons except in self‑defense. U.S. vetoes several Security Council resolutions condemning the invasion.

1983: U.S. troops sent to Lebanon as part of a multinational peacekeeping force; intervene on one side of a civil war, including bombardment by USS New Jersey. Withdraw after suicide bombing of marine barracks.

1984: U.S.‑backed rebels in Afghanistan fire on civilian airliner.11

1987-92: U.S. arms used by Israel to repress first Palestinian Intifada. U.S. vetoes five Security Council resolution condemning Israeli repression.

1988: Saddam Hussein kills many thousands of his own Kurdish population and uses chemical weapons against them. The U.S. increases its economic ties to Iraq.

1988: U.S. vetoes 3 Security Council resolutions condemning continuing Israeli occupation of and repression in Lebanon.

1990‑91: U.S. rejects any diplomatic settlement of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait (for example, rebuffing any attempt to link the two regional occupations, of Kuwait and of Palestine). U.S. leads international coalition in war against Iraq. Civilian infrastructure targeted.12 To promote "stability" U.S. refuses to aid post‑war uprisings by Shi'ites in the south and Kurds in the north, denying the rebels access to captured Iraqi weapons and refusing to prohibit Iraqi helicopter flights.13

1991‑: Devastating economic sanctions are imposed on Iraq. U.S. and Britain block all attempts to lift them. Hundreds of thousands die. Though Security Council had stated that sanctions were to be lifted once Saddam Hussein's programs to develop weapons of mass destruction were ended, Washington makes it known that the sanctions would remain as long as Saddam remains in power. Sanctions in fact strengthen Saddam's position. Asked about the horrendous human consequences of the sanctions, Madeleine Albright (U.S. ambassador to the UN and later Secretary of State) declares that "the price is worth it."14

1991-: U.S. forces permanently based in Saudi Arabia.

1993‑: U.S. launches missile attack on Iraq, claiming self‑defense against an alleged assassination attempt on former president Bush two months earlier.15

1998: U.S. and U.K. bomb Iraq over the issue of weapons inspections, even though Security Council is just then meeting to discuss the matter.

1998: U.S. destroys factory producing half of Sudan's pharmaceutical supply, claiming retaliation for attacks on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya and that factory was involved in chemical warfare. Evidence for the chemical warfare charge widely disputed.16

2000-: Israel uses U.S. arms in attempt to crush Palestinian uprising, killing hundreds of civilians.

Note:

The list above presents some specific incidents of U.S. policy in the Middle East. The list minimizes the grievances against the United States in the region because it excludes more generalized long‑standing policies, such as U.S. backing for authoritarian regimes (arming Saudi Arabia, training the secret police in Iran under the Shah, providing arms and aid to Turkey as it ruthlessly attacked Kurdish villages, etc.). The list also excludes many actions of Israel in which the United States is indirectly implicated because of its military, diplomatic, and economic backing for Israel.

Why is a stranger born on one side of an invisible line more important than a stranger born on another side of an invisible line?
I guessing it has something to do with the fact that one of the strangers shares your language, history, and customs and other does not. I would add the stranger on the other side would take away everything you have known when it comes down to it. Just a hunch though.

Before you say or do things like this, just remember that you will be judged by God.
No he won't actually since god isnt real

It's not even a matter of choosing between the two. You could have had it so that neither Americans nor Iraqis died en masse. But no, you just hadto commit genocide.
how is it genocide exactly?

I'm a pantywaist for thinking that murder is wrong and a sin?
We all have different definitions of murder



If you love your country so much that you want to destroy other countries, you're not patriotic, you're a nationalist looney.
Generally when one loves one country, when it comes down to it they are willing to destroy other countries or nations to preserve their own. Im not sure that that makes one looney though.
So what God wants means nothing to you when it doesn't suit your gut feelings then?

Why do you always revel in your gut instincts of bloodlust? That's exactly what Jesus is trying to lead us away from.
There is nothing more natural in humans than bloodlust. And fyi, Jesus wasnt real.

so terrorism is ok, is basically what your saying here.

no what i was saying was when you oppress people they act violently.
think of it like, its easier to catch flies with sugar than vinegar.

i come from a "terrorist" country, so i know how these people think. if you hurt my friends or family, nothing will stop me from killing you. when you lose your family, it doesnt matter what you do cause you cant sink any lower, so you blow up people for revenge.

give them what they want and they will stop. what they want is peace for thier family.

.1) The USA attacked a sovereign nation for no reason. If you remember correctly the terrorists were based in Afghanistan according to the US government. That is failing miserably. Iraq was the scapegoat.
What part of Afghanistan was a failure? was it the establishing a new government friendly to the west or was it the part where al-Qeada was sent on the run to Pakistan, not allowing them to plan and execute attacks?
2) Iraq may have been a dictatorship but I'd rather have someone like Saddam ruling with an Iron fist which kept the whole of the Middle East quiet than a nation sinking into civil war and other nations fighting each other.
Which is why another dictator should be put in place, one friendly to the west.
3) Why is one life worth more than another purely because of geographical location? Answer it isn't. Human life is sacred and ALL people are born equal.
Idealism is so very cute. Let me ask something. Would you rather live in a shack with nothing but a dirt floor in the middle of an here where no one is like you, and no one dies. Or would you rather keep everything you have, and gain even more if it meant that someone you have never met 1,000s of miles from you was killed?
4) The US has started and continued an illegal war against a nation that hadn't threatened the US. Does the Geneva convention ring a bell.
Illegal by whos definitions?
5) The killing of terrorists and innocent civilians creates more terrorists not less genius:rolleyes:
The killing of terrorists creates terrorists? Im sorry I cant follow that logic
6) Some of the biggest terrorists attacka have occured since the start of the war. Here's a list of a few:

9/11
The London Bombings
The Madrid Train Bombings
The Bali Bombings
I had no idea 9/11 occured after the war on terror. Your a smart one you are.

no what i was saying was when you oppress people they act violently.
think of it like, its easier to catch flies with sugar than vinegar.

i come from a "terrorist" country, so i know how these people think. if you hurt my friends or family, nothing will stop me from killing you. when you lose your family, it doesnt matter what you do cause you cant sink any lower, so you blow up people for revenge.

give them what they want and they will stop. what they want is peace for thier family.
oh, even better just give the terrorists what they want. I bet it would be super fun to live under shria law and where I couldn't drink or see naked women.

what ever country you are from must have a shit education system.

the main reason why the terrorist exist is that they come from oppressed countries, religion has little to do with it. some times religion gets mixed with politics.
islam and christianity is practically the same.

haevey christians are against porn aswell. remember larry flint?

i appolagise for bad ability of typiung, my wrist is ingured, so i spell things wrong and cant re-write it cause it is hard.

what ever country you are from must have a shit education system.

the main reason why the terrorist exist is that they come from oppressed countries, religion has little to do with it. some times religion gets mixed with politics.
islam and christianity is practically the same.

haevey christians are against porn aswell. remember larry flint?
ok smart guy. What is it that the terrorists want and why should we give it to them?

As for the OP:
:rolleyes:


it's friday.

I'm a card carrying commie pink on friday from 3-4.
:eek:

COMMIE!!

*flees*

What part of Afghanistan was a failure? was it the establishing a new government friendly to the west or was it the part where al-Qeada was sent on the run to Pakistan, not allowing them to plan and execute attacks?

Possibly the part that has left the Taliban alive and in control of part of Afghanistan. If we went in their to force the country to be friendly, the least we could do is to finish the job we started and kill off the unfriendly rebels.

Which is why another dictator should be put in place, one friendly to the west.
A short term solution that creates long term problems. Dictators have a lifespan, usually shorter than most depending on the success of assassins, revolutionary elements, etc. Once the dictators are gone, the people under them will want nothing to do with the power that put the dictator there in the first place, in this case us. We'll only be showing future generations of Iraqis that they shouldn't trust us to do anything but use them for our own gain.

Idealism is so very cute. Let me ask something. Would you rather live in a shack with nothing but a dirt floor in the middle of an here where no one is like you, and no one dies. Or would you rather keep everything you have, and gain even more if it meant that someone you have never met 1,000s of miles from you was killed?
What are we gaining from this? I have yet to see anything beneficial enough to myself to justify the war in Iraq and the continuing occupation. All we seem to be getting out of this mess is a horrible reputation worldwide, ans our reputation wasn't stellar to begin with.

The killing of terrorists creates terrorists? Im sorry I cant follow that logic
This happens two ways. First, the family and friends of the deceased may take up their cause in rememberance or out of vengeance. Our troops over in Iraq haven't confined their killing to terrorists, either, so this can also inspire the families of civilians killed in combat to become terrorists. Second, the organizations they work for applaud the deaths of their terrorists as martyrdom, turning ineffective terrorists into effective symbols that can be used to recruit new generations as terrorists.

Possibly the part that has left the Taliban alive and in control of part of Afghanistan. If we went in their to force the country to be friendly, the least we could do is to finish the job we started and kill off the unfriendly rebels.
If Im not mistaken the US is sending 10,000 more troops to Afghanistan so you will get your wish.

A short term solution that creates long term problems. Dictators have a lifespan, usually shorter than most depending on the success of assassins, revolutionary elements, etc. Once the dictators are gone, the people under them will want nothing to do with the power that put the dictator there in the first place, in this case us. We'll only be showing future generations of Iraqis that they shouldn't trust us to do anything but use them for our own gain.
Saddam lasted 30 something years, Castro almost 50. They can last if they are smart enough

What are we gaining from this? I have yet to see anything beneficial enough to myself to justify the war in Iraq and the continuing occupation. All we seem to be getting out of this mess is a horrible reputation worldwide, ans our reputation wasn't stellar to begin with.
Well they are sureing up the oil flow and have set up bases to attack either Syria from east with the help of Israel from the west or Iran from east with NATO and US coming in from the east.

This happens two ways. First, the family and friends of the deceased may take up their cause in rememberance or out of vengeance. Our troops over in Iraq haven't confined their killing to terrorists, either, so this can also inspire the families of civilians killed in combat to become terrorists. Second, the organizations they work for applaud the deaths of their terrorists as martyrdom, turning ineffective terrorists into effective symbols that can be used to recruit new generations as terrorists.
So what your saying is that the families of terrorists should be killed just to be safe.

If Im not mistaken the US is sending 10,000 more troops to Afghanistan so you will get your wish.

Will they actually try to finish off the Taliban, or are they there to keep the status quo?

Saddam lasted 30 something years, Castro almost 50. They can last if they are smart enough
Saddam bit the hand that fed him and was ousted by the country that gave him power. His people reviled him and are trying him for warcrimes as we type. He lasted, but he did so at the expense of any favorable opinion of him and anyone that supported him. Probably the fact that we removed him after supporting him is the only thing that keep the Iraqis from associting him with us.

Well they are sureing up the oil flow and have set up bases to attack either Syria from east with the help of Israel from the west or Iran from east with NATO and US coming in from the east.
Securing the oil flow sure hasn't helped stabilize prices has it? Physical control of the supply hasn't shown much profit in the last three years. Setting up bases for military strikes hardly makes sense when the military is already extended in two occupied countries already. Unless we can get more support from other countries for military operations, unlikely given how little support the U.S. has internationally, setting up bases only allows us airstrikes at best, a capability we already had.

So what your saying is that the families of terrorists should be killed just to be safe.
Or maybe, just maybe, we don't have to kill anyone. Killing someone will stop them from doing anything we disagree with, but it can also lead to unintended consequences. Like family members taking up a loved one's cause or the use of the dead as a symbol. If we try something besides killing, like diplomacy, then we can avoid those unintended consequences while maintaining a favorable reputation with the rest of the world.

Will they actually try to finish off the Taliban, or are they there to keep the status quo?
I guess you will have to wait and see.

Saddam bit the hand that fed him and was ousted by the country that gave him power. His people reviled him and are trying him for warcrimes as we type. He lasted, but he did so at the expense of any favorable opinion of him and anyone that supported him. Probably the fact that we removed him after supporting him is the only thing that keep the Iraqis from associting him with us.
Iraq didnt give him power, the US did. He worked for awhile but sometimes I change needs to take place.

Securing the oil flow sure hasn't helped stabilize prices has it? Physical control of the supply hasn't shown much profit in the last three years. Setting up bases for military strikes hardly makes sense when the military is already extended in two occupied countries already. Unless we can get more support from other countries for military operations, unlikely given how little support the U.S. has internationally, setting up bases only allows us airstrikes at best, a capability we already had.
The prices are high because of refinery capabilities. If they were up to par, with the oil thats in Iraq, gas prices would be a dollar/gal. The US would have support, from Israel and/or NATO depending on the situation.

Or maybe, just maybe, we don't have to kill anyone. Killing someone will stop them from doing anything we disagree with, but it can also lead to unintended consequences. Like family members taking up a loved one's cause or the use of the dead as a symbol. If we try something besides killing, like diplomacy, then we can avoid those unintended consequences while maintaining a favorable reputation with the rest of the world
Oh yeah, I forgot the world was perfect. Silly me. Your right diplomacy works every time and no one ever has to die.

ok smart guy. What is it that the terrorists want and why should we give it to them?

what do you want? why should you have it? the same thing they want.

not to be blown up. people shouldnt have to tolerate war.

in my country it is illeagal to go to war with an other country. we havent been to war in 80 years. other than our terrorists. but most of them are now politicians helping the peace process.

other countries shouldnt invade other countries.

Iraq didnt give him power, the US did. He worked for awhile but sometimes I change needs to take place.


my understanding is that usa supported iraq to fight iran, cause iran nationalised thier oil fields, so british and american companies couldnt use them.

people should stop fighting each other for greed and start doing this.:fluffle:

Iraq didnt give him power, the US did. He worked for awhile but sometimes change needs to take place.

Unless the leaders of Iraq gain support from the people and not America, then we'll have to replace them every few decades. It keeps Iraq from stabilizing itself internally and, as we've seen over the past few years, internal strife in Iraq has a way of drawing in even more destabilizing elements. Without support from the Iraqis, America has to foot the bill to keep the leaders we want in their place so that the country doesn't become another anti-American theocracy. Eventually, we have a recurring expence of replacement and re-stabilization every few decades in a practice that does nothing to further America's reputation in any other part of the world. The costs in that kind of strategy far outweigh the benfits.

Oh yeah, I forgot the world was perfect. Silly me. Your right diplomacy works every time and no one ever has to die.

The world isn't perfect, but people are reasonable. Most would rather talk than fight to the death, and so long as you can avoid the expense and negative attention that comes from pursuing a militaristic foreign policy, you should.

get people to do what you want by handing out flowers and candy.

I guessing it has something to do with the fact that one of the strangers shares your language, history, and customs and other does not.What's so great about any nation's language, history, or customs?

I would add the stranger on the other side would take away everything you have known when it comes down to it. Just a hunch though.The average Iraqi would take away everything I've ever known?

So according to you, every sunni Arab wants to destroy everything non-Muslim and establish a Caliphate, thus should be put into work camps. If that's not racism, then the KKK sure as hell wasn't racist either.

We just can't trust them to behave in accordance with OUR slightest whim.
Ergo: ceterum censeo Carthaginem delendam esse.

Coincidentally: what makes the Klan so unsavoury bears on racism only tangentially.
What makes them a clear and present danger is that they are treacherous and disloyal. They are - after all - non-aligned.

Given a choice between American or non-american lives - I choose American. Duh. Given a choice between America or somewhere else - I choose somewhere else. - Duh. So far no suicide bombers in the US.
Yep. As opposed to all those years you Americans suffered under Clinton where there were suicide bombers galore wandering the streets of the US.

Interested in buying my magic anti-tiger rock?
You seem just the sort of person who would get the most benefit from it.

get people to do what you want by handing out flowers and candy.
Or better yet, flowers made out of candy!

Or better yet, flowers made out of candy!


Rajiv Ghandi!

We just can't trust them to behave in accordance with OUR slightest whim.
Ergo: ceterum censeo Carthaginem delendam esse.

So how's this different from "We can't trust the blacks to behave in accordance to OUR slightest whim, ergo, slaves"?

I find it interesting that you've used the term "OUR slightest whim". To me, this translates to "I don't believe in democracy, I don't believe in tolerance, I don't believe in anything but a dictatorship. A dictatorship under me. You live, and die, at my pleasure."

Fitting yourself for jackboots and peaked cap are we mein Fuhrer?

Am I going to look in your cupboard and find a whole bunch of dead Arabs who you killed with this mentality?


Coincidentally: what makes the Klan so unsavoury bears on racism only tangentially.
What makes them a clear and present danger is that they are treacherous and disloyal.

Uh huh. So you had no problems with the Klan lynching freed blacks for no particular reason other than their skin color and lack of chains as well as vote intimidation with armed groups?


They are - after all - non-aligned.

Cheap shot. The KKK is aligned with racists xenophobes, and are more likely to align themselves with the crustier versions of conservatives.

And I'd rather be non-aligned, with enough weapons to kick your ass if need be, than be a dictator wannabe who should be put down like a dog.

If Im not mistaken the US is sending 10,000 more troops to Afghanistan so you will get your wish.


Saddam lasted 30 something years, Castro almost 50. They can last if they are smart enough


Well they are sureing up the oil flow and have set up bases to attack either Syria from east with the help of Israel from the west or Iran from east with NATO and US coming in from the east.


So what your saying is that the families of terrorists should be killed just to be safe.


The US is sooooooooooooooo concerned about Afghanistan ..they turned it over to NATO..:D :p

The US is sooooooooooooooo concerned about Afghanistan ..they turned it over to NATO..:D :p

Which the US pretty much runs. NATO=military organisation. The US has a military budget that exceeds all of NATO's members combined. Nice try. :rolleyes:

SNIP
Cheap shot.
SNIP

The CORRECT shot. The KKK acted and acts in defiance of Central Authority:
Quite enough to send 'em to Jack Ketch. Ditto for other subversive elements.

So basically you don't care about the Iraqis or Saddam; you just think that it was a good plan to put the terrorist focus on Iraq instead of the US right? Iraqi lives aren't worth shit right? They're justa buncha A-Rabs - uh-heeyuh.

I gotta ask you though... if all the terrorists are in Iraq, then why are there terrorists still trying and sometimes suceeding to carry out attacks on US, Canada, Spain , Great Britian, Israel... hmmm not so brilliant after all.

Like just about every Bushevik, B0zzy judges the success of the Iraq occupation and "The War on Terror"™ on a criterion of "Is the continental United States being attacked? No? Then it's working!!"

While at the same time ignoring the fact that maybe an attack on the CONUS is near the bottom of the terrorists' list and that Iraq has become a proving ground where N00b T3RR0R1$7$ can gain XP and skills before moving on to more precise operations.

Which the US pretty much runs. NATO=military organisation. The US has a military budget that exceeds all of NATO's members combined. Nice try. :rolleyes:


British commander and very few US troops...not even a try ...just a small and vital fact .

The Taliban is a waste ...they are confined to one area and are largely irrelivant..but give them a cookie for trying .

Dont insult NATO . You need to really aquire a clue so you can actually talk about a subject without seeming so foolish .

Like just about every Bushevik, B0zzy judges the success of the Iraq occupation and "The War on Terror"™ on a criterion of "Is the continental United States being attacked? No? Then it's working!!"

While at the same time ignoring the fact that maybe an attack on the CONUS is near the bottom of the terrorists' list and that Iraq has become a proving ground where N00b T3RR0R1$7$ can gain XP and skills before moving on to more precise operations.


I raq has become the place terrorist go to die . get real they dont even TRY to stand up to US forces anymore since they had there guts torn out..they blow up kids and women and guys standing in line....

Not much of a threat to troops though.:p

people should stop fighting each other for greed and start doing this.

Merging our faces together and wildly flapping our arms? That doesn't seem to make too much sense.

get people to do what you want by handing out flowers and candy.

Must be some damn good candy and flowers.

Or better yet, flowers made out of candy!

You might wanna keep them seperate so you don't confuse the...less "Enlightened" folk of the world.

I raq has become the place terrorist go to die . get real they dont even TRY to stand up to US forces anymore since they had there guts torn out..they blow up kids and women and guys standing in line....

Not much of a threat to troops though.:p

Tell that to the 63 people who died a few days ago from another road side suicide bombing, and the nearly 2,600 american soldiers lost so far.

Unless you think the curfews and martial law are for kicks.

Tell that to the 63 people who died a few days ago from another road side suicide bombing, and the nearly 2,600 american soldiers lost so far.

Unless you think the curfews and martial law are for kicks.


ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE MY POINT ??? :D

ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE MY POINT ??? :D

Were you under the impression that there were NOT soldiers killed in that blast?

Your basic argument is that the terrorists are ineffective because they're not meeting US forces head on. Well of course they're not, would you sumo wrestle a truck?

But 2600 american troops ARE dead, and while these groups might not be fighting them head on, they are blowing them up with frequent regularity.

The fact is, this is not a battle of soldier against soldier. This is not a war fought by armies meeting in the battlefield and fighting until one is defeated.

This is a battle of hearts and minds. These groups don't want to kill the american army (well, they do, but recognize there's no hope of that). They want to start turning the population against us.

And every time one of these bombs goes off, every time someone dies, that's someone's family, someone's father, someone's sibling, someone who leaves behind a family to wonder why they had to die, and what could have stopped it.

And every time it does, someone somewhere looks out on to the empty streets of her village, during the most recent curfew, and sees foreign soldiers policing her land, and realizes she exchanged being executed for breaking Saddam's law for being shot for breaking the soldiers', done "for her own protection". And sees she's traded a burkha for a lockdown. And for that one brief moment she begins to think "is this really freedom?" and starts at that moment to question that maybe, just maybe, it'd be better if those Americans just left. And at that moment, someone else some terrorist mastermind smiles, because he just got another one.

It's all about hearts and minds.

The Taliban is a waste ...they are confined to one area and are largely irrelivant..but give them a cookie for trying .

The taliban effectively controls a large part of the Southern provinces and denies control in many other parts of AFG.

Karzai's writ does not run outside of Kabul and NA strongholds in the north.

Or better yet, flowers made out of candy!

i think you are a genius. that idea is super fantastic.

And every time it does, someone somewhere looks out on to the empty streets of her village, during the most recent curfew, and sees foreign soldiers policing her land, and realizes she exchanged being executed for breaking Saddam's law for being shot for breaking the soldiers', done "for her own protection". And sees she's traded a burkha for a lockdown. And for that one brief moment she begins to think "is this really freedom?" and starts at that moment to question that maybe, just maybe, it'd be better if those Americans just left. And at that moment, someone else some terrorist mastermind smiles, because he just got another one.

But then she's raped and murdered by the American troops, so the mastermind's a bit screwed.

What's so great about any nation's language, history, or customs?
The fact that you share them with your country man. Go to Russia, meet a Russian. Then try to have the conversation were having without using a translator and niether or you speak the same language. Then go to the middle east and try to eat with your left hand. Maybe then you will get the idea on why those things are so great.
The average Iraqi would take away everything I've ever known?
I guessing if it came down to either taking everything away from you or defending Iraq, he would choose the former.

The CORRECT shot. The KKK acted and acts in defiance of Central Authority:
Quite enough to send 'em to Jack Ketch. Ditto for other subversive elements.

And yet you somehow attempt to link rebellion is the equivalence of being unaligned. Furthermore, you're past actions in regards to my policies indicates that your choice of words were specifically worded to attack me.

So yes, it is a cheap shot. And one that is factually wrong too. You fail.

Terrorism and Iraq didn't mix...

The fact that you share them with your country man. Go to Russia, meet a Russian. Then try to have the conversation were having without using a translator and niether or you speak the same language. Then go to the middle east and try to eat with your left hand. Maybe then you will get the idea on why those things are so great.All right. Wanna buy my plane ticket and hotel accomodations?

I guessing if it came down to either taking everything away from you or defending Iraq, he would choose the former.Why should it come down to that at all?

Give Saddam, Iraq back!

Given the fact they've made shite of it, I doubt he'd take it.

how is it genocide exactly?
Setting up a situation where you know Iraqis will be killed en masse. Over 30,000 have died.

We all have different definitions of murder
Hypocrites condemn murder, while supporting their own version of it.

Generally when one loves one country, when it comes down to it they are willing to destroy other countries or nations to preserve their own.
If there is no choice, then yes, but in this case there was a choice. And the government chose to destroy a country.

There is nothing more natural in humans than bloodlust. And fyi, Jesus wasnt real.
That's arguable, and just because it's natural doesn't mean it's good.

The killing of terrorists creates terrorists? Im sorry I cant follow that logic
The belief that killing terrorists eliminates terrorism is based on the delusion that terrorists are born, not made.

Brilliance? You call what is effectively hiding behind another innocent person brilliance? Is it somehow ok for you to be using Iraqis as human shields? That's not brilliant. Knocking someone out and using their body to shield yours is a plan any dumb jackass under fire could come up with. That's not a brilliant plan, that's a cowardly plan. That's the plan of a person who feels that other people's lives have less value than their own. If we're talking about a people, rather than just an individual, then that's a bigot's plan.

Brilliance? You call what is effectively hiding behind another innocent person brilliance? Is it somehow ok for you to be using Iraqis as human shields? That's not brilliant. Knocking someone out and using their body to shield yours is a plan any dumb jackass under fire could come up with. That's not a brilliant plan, that's a cowardly plan. That's the plan of a person who feels that other people's lives have less value than their own. If we're talking about a people, rather than just an individual, then that's a bigot's plan.


hah - that is so true - I never thought of it that way really. I bet those that are saying its a great plan to have terrorists kill innocent Iraqi civilians rahter than ourselves are also condemning Hizbulla for using Lebanese civilians in the same way. Now, how will they explain away the hypocrisy?

Honestly, looking at that whole situation, I can't descide what's more dispicable; being the ones using the human shields, or being the ones shooting at them anyway. And it seems that this draws a universal "Oh well, they shouldn't have been in our way" from supporters of Israel.

Setting up a situation where you know Iraqis will be killed en masse. Over 30,000 have died.
30,000 is hardly genocide. Beside in order for it to be genocide it has to fit the definition of a strategic killing of a group of people by another group simply because they are of that group. This doesnt even come close to what is going on in Iraq. So please get your facts straight before throwing around words like "genocide" or calling Bush a "Nazi"

Hypocrites condemn murder, while supporting their own version of it.
thats a cute catch phrase but it doesnt change the fact that we all do have different definitons of murder. For instance, I support the death penalty. Some that does not would consider it murder. So you see, I am in fact right.

If there is no choice, then yes, but in this case there was a choice. And the government chose to destroy a country.
destroy, really? Come on man

That's arguable, and just because it's natural doesn't mean it's good.
It would have to be at least a little good or it wouldn't be natural.

The belief that killing terrorists eliminates terrorism is based on the delusion that terrorists are born, not made.
That statement is based on the delusion that killing someone does not eliminate them.

That statement is based on the delusion that killing someone does not eliminate them.

It sure had a hard time working on Jesus...

It sure had a hard time working on Jesus...
psstt, hey buddy heres a secret, Jesus wasnt real. Just so you know

It'd be a good thing to remember that the attack before 9/11 took place 8 years prior.

It's also a good thing to remember Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Also, killing someone does eliminate them, but it tends to motivate the rest who are still alive, making more join this group. Thousands of humans are born every day, quite a lot of them to Muslim parents. When they grow up, they will see what is being done to their people with their own eyes, and they won't like it. Al-Qaeda recruiters are having an easy time right now, and why shouldn't they? Take a peek at the last "What would you do if your country was invaded" poll. It shows how readily people would turn into "guerillas" (which is what you call a terrorist who's on your side).

So how many people will you leave alive that you trust not to become so enraged that they will join the terrorists? A million? A thousand? Yourself?

All right. Wanna buy my plane ticket and hotel accomodations?

Why should it come down to that at all?
way to not refute my points at all, keep up the good work.

Given a choice between American or non-american lives - I choose American. Duh. Given a choice between America or somewhere else - I choose somewhere else. - Duh. So far no suicide bombers in the US.

Suggesting I am a bigot only shows the limited scope of your ability to have a civil discussion and the barren nature of your point.

What about the Americans we're sending there to die?

You think that many tens of thousands of Iraq deaths are unimportant compared to no particular likelihood of any American deaths?

Do you have any interest in buying my magic tiger-repelent rock? I've never been attacked by a tiger as long as I've owned it.

To call bigotry on the guy who calls the massacre of tens of thousands of Iraqis "BRILLIANT" is hardly a limited scope of understanding. However, if you're trying to be satirical you need to be a bit more obvious. What you've said here isn't really beyond the scope of the inverse morality of a Rush Limbaugh fan. Even your glaring errors in logic and omission of truth are well within the Limbaughnian range.

It goes back to the post I made on Republican vs Democratic satire (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=11505846#post11505846) yesterday.

But then she's raped and murdered by the American troops, so the mastermind's a bit screwed.

Well, Rush Limbaugh would say that raping and murdering them is a "brilliant maneuver." It would teach them that if they mess with us they're dead. If they don't mess with us they're dead. If they do anything at all, or we just feel like it, they're dead. At least, that's what he said about Abu Ghraib (the bit in quotes, the rest was just commentary).

Rush Limblaugh - would he be as shite without the drugs? Theres a question for 10 pints later.....

This is the right war at the right time ..but run like a Chineses fire drill.

The idiots running this war , need new jobs .

psstt, hey buddy heres a secret, Jesus wasnt real. Just so you know
It's historical fact that he was real. Now whether or not he was the sun of god and rose from the grave and so on, he was definitely a martyr for his cause. Killing him didn't eliminate his effect, and might have prolonged it.

Anyway, just so you know that your the guy cowering behind a few million innocent people. And don't give me that "They are too!" shit, because we're supposed to be fucking BETTER than they are. When did the moral high ground become so unachievable to american politics that we don't even bother any more?

I wonder - if the OP is so sure of the brilliance of the current situation in Iraq then why he/she is posting on a messageboard rather than actively serving in his/her military in Iraq and basking in the sheer brilliance of it all?

Still this statement -

'For thirty years the US tried to ignore Arab militants and terrorists. Hell - we even just packed up after the Lebanon marine base bombing.

shows an incredible lack of knowledge of American involvement in the region.

For example here is a picture from 1983 -

http://www.noapparentmotive.org/images/Rumsfeld-Hussein.jpg

See the guy on the left? That would be Donald Rumsfeld. The guy on the right? That would be Sadam.

As for no US involvement in the region after the bombing of the US Marines in Beruit is just total rubbish. Who was selling the Mujahideen the Stinger system to take out Soviet aircraft? That would be the US.

What about the US involvement with Saddam during the 'Whirlwind War'? The US was providing Iraq with satellite imagery of the Iranian positions around Khorramsahr, Dezful and other battlefields.

I think the OP needs to really gain a decent understanding of the history of western involvement before posting such utter tripe.

I wonder - if the OP is so sure of the brilliance of the current situation in Iraq then why he/she is posting on a messageboard rather than actively serving in his/her military in Iraq and basking in the sheer brilliance of it all?

Still this statement -

'For thirty years the US tried to ignore Arab militants and terrorists. Hell - we even just packed up after the Lebanon marine base bombing.

shows an incredible lack of knowledge of American involvement in the region.

For example here is a picture from 1983 -

http://www.noapparentmotive.org/images/Rumsfeld-Hussein.jpg

See the guy on the left? That would be Donald Rumsfeld. The guy on the right? That would be Sadam.

As for no US involvement in the region after the bombing of the US Marines in Beruit is just total rubbish. Who was selling the Mujahideen the Stinger system to take out Soviet aircraft? That would be the US.

What about the US involvement with Saddam during the 'Whirlwind War'? The US was providing Iraq with satellite imagery of the Iranian positions around Khorramsahr, Dezful and other battlefields.

I think the OP needs to really gain a decent understanding of the history of western involvement before posting such utter tripe.
Bolding mine. I already mentioned that history a few posts back:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11499167&postcount=69

Read 'em and weep!!

Bolding mine. I already mentioned that history a few posts back:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11499167&postcount=69

Read 'em and weep!!

Oddly it is missing one of the most important incidents - the USS Stark where Regan basically blamed Iran for the incident and let Iraq off. This was the point where Iran became in essence the pariah state, despite the fact that Iraq had been using chemical weapons against Iran.

At the end of the day the entire situation is a nightmare and a quagmire combined. The virtiol is now far too ingrained to allow for a solution.

All I can see in the future are more henious crimes and continued warfare.

Oddly it is missing one of the most important incidents - the USS Stark where Regan basically blamed Iran for the incident and let Iraq off. This was the point where Iran became in essence the pariah state, despite the fact that Iraq had been using chemical weapons against Iran.

At the end of the day the entire situation is a nightmare and a quagmire combined. The virtiol is now far too ingrained to allow for a solution.

All I can see in the future are more henious crimes and continued warfare.



No IRAN in essence became the PAHRIA state when it KIDNAPPED and held americans hostage for over a fucking year and every american got to watch it on TV .
Thats what first intriduced the average American to the beuty of Islamic revolution and why its so easy for Americans to watch Iran get fucked with by Iraq and naturaly support Saddam AGAINST Iran ...who the FUCK wants Iran in charge ..especially seeing the way their America is SATAN campaign worked out ? Then you have hezbollah backed by iran blowing up a few hundred sleeping Marines....

The astonishing thing is that Iran still exist at all ...not that its a Pahria state . But Carter was a weak assed dolt as a President .


get your facts straight mate .

No IRAN in essence became the PAHRIA state when it KIDNAPPED and held americans hostage for over a fucking year and every american got to watch it on TV .
Thats what first intriduced the average American to the beuty of Islamic revolution and why its so easy for Americans to watch Iran get fucked with by Iraq and naturaly support Saddam AGAINST Iran ...who the FUCK wants Iran in charge ..especially seeing the way their America is SATAN campaign worked out ? Then you have hezbollah backed by iran blowing up a few hundred sleeping Marines....

The astonishing thing is that Iran still exist at all ...not that its a Pahria state . But Carter was a weak assed dolt as a President .


get your facts straight mate .


Then why did the Iranians and Americans have discussions to 'normalise relations'? Why did America use Isreal to ship weapons to the Iranians in the Inran/Contra affair? Why did America support Saddam while he was happily gassing the Iranians (a WAR CRIME) while at the same time making dodgy deals with every other fekker in the region (Bahrain, Saudi et al).

Your 'facts' are nothing but talking head bollocks....mate.

Then why did the Iranians and Americans have discussions to 'normalise relations'? Why did America use Isreal to ship weapons to the Iranians in the Inran/Contra affair? Why did America support Saddam while he was happily gassing the Iranians (a WAR CRIME) while at the same time making dodgy deals with every other fekker in the region (Bahrain, Saudi et al).

Your 'facts' are nothing but talking head bollocks....mate.


political expediance .pragmatism cold war politics and misguided intentions.

And none of this changes the FACT that americans are the enemy of Iran and Iran is the enemy of the US .

You figure it out yet ?

political expediance .pragmatism cold war politics and misguided intentions.

And none of this changes the FACT that americans are the enemy of Iran and Iran is the enemy of the US .

You figure it out yet ?

Oh dear. Another wannabe analyst.

I mean this in the nicest way - but you're full of shit. You really have no evidence that the lack of terrorist events in the US is doe to anything other than Bush and Rumsfeld excellent strategy of moving the war closer to the terrorists. They have no need to go thorugh the trouble of buying a plane ticket to become martyrs anymore. Brilliance!

After all these posts in this thread, this one's still my favorite. "You can't prove me wrong, therefore I'm right. Neener neener neener!" This line of reasoning is often quoted by Creationists. "You can't prove it wasn't God creating the world in six days, can you? CAN YOU? No? There you go. Genesis was right."

How tall am I? I'm 5'6". Can you prove I'm not 5'6"? Can you prove to me that my birthdate is not June 23rd? Can you prove that my name isn't Bob McNamara? Anyone? Ok, now that we have that settled, my name is Bob McNamara, I was born on June 23rd, and I am 5'6". Neener neener neener.

My name is Bob McNamara, I was born on June 23rd, and I am 5'6". Neener neener neener.

Just so we're clear, none of these statements are actually true; they were put here for illustrative purposes. Also, just how much money and human life have wer put into this war? For it to turn into a disaster area. The best we can hope for is a fragile democracy that will still have to contend with groups in the similar ilk of Hamas and Hezbollah. The worst we can hope for is a one-party Iran-style theocracy. That is, if Iraq is still one state, and frankly, if I'm the UN, I try to carve out the northern part of Iraq and kreat a Kurdistan (though no parts of any other nations would be available for this...this is the Shut Turkey The Hell Up rule.)

How tall am I? I'm 5'6". Can you prove I'm not 5'6"? Can you prove to me that my birthdate is not June 23rd? Can you prove that my name isn't Bob McNamara? Anyone? Ok, now that we have that settled, my name is Bob McNamara, I was born on June 23rd, and I am 5'6". Neener neener neener.

My brother used to walk around with his hand on his girlfriend's breast, telling her that this kept them from being attacked by tigers. He would correctly point out that they were never attacked by tigers when he did so, neglecting to mention that tigers do not live in rural Canada.

Come to think of it, my brother was pretty smart when he was fourteen.

Then why did the Iranians and Americans have discussions to 'normalise relations'? Why did America use Isreal to ship weapons to the Iranians in the Inran/Contra affair? Why did America support Saddam while he was happily gassing the Iranians (a WAR CRIME) while at the same time making dodgy deals with every other fekker in the region (Bahrain, Saudi et al).

Your 'facts' are nothing but talking head bollocks....mate.
You ask good questions, :) but I am not to sure that you will get good answers.

Keep up with the good work.

You ask good questions, :) but I am not to sure that you will get good answers.

Keep up with the good work.

I take no pride in that....I find it incredibly sad that the talking heads of neocon policy have no time to actually research the subject indepth.

Sadly the same goes for many of the new breed of journo's as well.

We need more Robert Fisks...

:D Encore cette merde...
Emmerdeurs at nauseam ... (soupir ...)

Will those who consider the Iraq War brilliant please stand up?

*sits down*